He has some other examples that are really quite suitable …

So this whole series clearly testifies that the modern Russian language has developed with you and me, native speakers of the Russian language, the same automatic mechanism, which consists in the fact that if you still want to pronounce an unstressed word separately, then you hit it on the first syllable.

This is how that ́li arises, in which, at first glance, the stress has shifted in the opposite direction compared to already ·.

NP: Is there any way to explain why the first syllable is preferred?

AZ: That’s right, I was waiting for this question. In this regard, I will say the following: what is the explanation in our life, especially in the humanities? It is for some fact to find the previous fact from which it will flow. This will be called an explanation. But about this previous fact, you can always ask: why is he? Do you understand? And then you can ask about the previous fact of the second rank, third, fourth, tenth – and so, generally speaking, up to the foundations of the universe. So, roughly speaking, I do not know how to answer your question. I know only one step deeper – but, generally speaking, you can ask about two, or maybe a million. Because that event will also have its own reason. As you know, all the first causes should not be known by us, but only by the highest knowledge.

E. V. Paducheva: Oh, Rose, or … you won’t be mine?

AZ: Well, this is, of course, an imitation of Odessa. In that dialect, this is no longer a union, but an interrogative word of the type perhaps, thereby no longer unstressed.

NP: And before that … in the monuments did they put stress on some unstressed words, and above or they put stress on the second and – above or, in the monuments?

A.Z .: Yes, this is also a correct question. I think that in the monuments of, say, the 16th century, this was not yet unstressed. Of course, there are as many cases as you want when the stress is not worth it, but I cannot judge whether it is a pure omission of the stress mark or unstressed. The important thing is that there are enough examples where the stress is, and then it is only or ·.

N.P .: The point is that these unstressed words can appear before an introductory parenthesis …

A.Z .: Well, of course …

NP: No, they can be used not in an isolated position, but can stand before the parenthesis. And then they must somehow be struck, because there is no further syntagma, further …

A.Z .: Well, I see. But you understand that there will be one in two hundred such cases, as you say.

NP: I am giving an example of a line from Onegin: Or (but this is no joke). So my question is …

AZ: Can you imagine with what probability the text of such a structure will be found in the monuments of the 16th century?

I.I. and others: Andrei Anatolyevich, there is just or! There is just or, there is iambic …

NP: There is an iambic line. That is, most likely, in the 18th – early 19th centuries, they could say with an emphasis on the second syllable …

A.Z .: Oh, in this sense?

N.P .: Yes.

AZ: Yes, here I completely agree with you. It had to be like this.

N.P .: That is, if you said that in the 18th century it was already entrenched …

A.Z .: I roughened up the picture when I told you that until the end of the 17th century, either it was, and then that’s it. This, by the way, does not happen.

N.P .: That is, after all we say this line or – but this is a rare case of reaccentuation …

AZ: I did not understand your pathos. But you are absolutely right.

NP: This is a rare case of re-accentuation in the lines of poetry … that very poetry …

A.Z .: And here it is not over-accentuation – just an old accentuation.

NP: And only here they spoke with the old – and did not see violence against the language.

A.Z .: Right. Yes, I think so. This is a good example, indeed, I did not know him, did not know that this opportunity could still reach Pushkin. He has some other examples that are really quite suitable …

NP: With or?

AZ: No, no, on another occasion, where it is clear that a very old stress could suddenly remain, and it is not at all some kind of special poetic liberty.

NP: I suspected that this line was then uttered by Eli (but this is no joke) and it was not some kind of violence.

AZ: Yes, yes, undoubtedly so. This is a very good example. Thank! Great. All! (The audience applauds.)

T.V. Zabolotskaya: Excuse me, please, I want to ask along the way, I forgot: a syllable that … It is clear that “consonant + vowel” is an open syllable, but “consonant, sonorous and vowel” is also an open syllable, Yes? In the morning because … Well, a similar Mikhailovich …

AZ: Yes, of course, tra – there is no syllable section between t and p, tr goes together.

TV Zabolotskaya: And this is an open syllable.

A.Z .: Yes. It’s like in Latin: u-tra is an open syllable.

GP Morozova: If we go back to the knots, corners and eels, they all have the first. Are there such examples with and the first?

A.Z .: To find something else with a fluent vowel, the Russian language did not provide us with an opportunity.

G.P. Morozova: Eagle? ..

In the laboratory frame of reference, how to start a synthesis essay the entire dynamics of parton splitting in a fast-flying proton looks as if frozen due to the relativistic effect of time dilation. Therefore, the hard process of collision of two protons can be considered as a collision of two separate partons, while the rest of the partons fly by and do not participate in the hard reaction.

The processes of splitting and fusion of partons lead to the fact that their energies are not fixed, and with some probability can be any – from a certain minimum value and almost up to the energy of the entire proton. That is why one speaks not just of partons, but of parton densities: q (x), g (x), etc., where x is the fraction of the energy of an ultrarelativistic proton carried by a given parton.

Parton densities are used to calculate the cross section for hard processes in proton collisions. Simplified, it can be written like this:

    σ (pp → X) = ∫∫ dx1 dx2 fa (x1) fb (x2) σ (ab → X)

Here it is assumed that the X system was born in the collision of partons “a” and “b” with a fraction of the energy x1 and x2 in the first and second protons, respectively, f (x) are parton densities, and the integrals are taken over all admissible values.

Parton densities depend on one more variable – the scale of the process rigidity. The stiffness scale, relatively speaking, shows at what distances the collision of partons occurs (that is, the ab → X subprocess in the above formula). The tougher the process, the more partons can take part in it, that is, the higher the parton density at a given scale of rigidity.

Unfortunately, it has not yet been possible to calculate the distribution of partons in a proton from first principles. However, there is a known law according to which parton densities increase with increasing scale of rigidity (these are the DGLAP equations, named after Dokshitser – Gribov – Lipatov – Altarelli – Parisi). Using these equations, one can parameterize the parton densities and manage with a very small number of parameters. An important property of parton densities is their universality. If they are determined using a set of data, then they can then be used for all other experiments described in the framework of the same formalism.

Additional literature:

F. Helsen, A. Martin. “Quarks and leptons. Introduction to the physics of elementary particles “, Moscow,” Mir “, 1987. J. Collins. What exactly is a parton density? // hep-ph / 0304122., Origin of Life: Science and Faith (Science, Evolution, and Creationism)

The book, created by a group of experts from the US National Academy of Sciences and the American Institute of Medicine, tells about scientific discoveries that confirm the truth of the theory of evolution and clearly show the effectiveness of its application in various fields of human activity – from industry and agriculture to medicine and pharmacology. …

Publishing house “CORPUS”, Publishing house “Astrel”, 2010Title page of the book

Foreword

Preface to the Russian edition

Thanks

Chapter first

Evolution and the nature of science

There is more and more indisputable evidence of biological evolution every day.

The principle of biological evolution underlies all modern biology.

Evolution and medicine: fighting new infections

Evolution and agriculture: domestication of wheat

Evolution can occur due to both small and large changes in populations of living organisms.

Evolution and industry: natural selection at work

Scientists are looking for an explanation of natural phenomena based on experimental data.

Is evolution a theory or a fact?

It is possible to combine trust in scientific evidence for evolution with religious beliefs.

Quotes from statements by leading religious leaders who believe that faith and science do not contradict each other

Quotes from statements by scholars who believe that faith and science do not contradict each other

Chapter two

Evidence for biological evolution

Evidence for biological evolution comes from many areas of science.

The emergence of the universe, our galaxy and the solar system led to the formation of the conditions necessary for the evolution of life on Earth.

Radiometric dating

Living organisms appeared on Earth during the first billion years of its existence.

The fossil record contains countless evidence of evolution, reflecting many of the details of its course.

Structural and behavioral similarities often indicate descent from a common ancestor.

Evolution makes it possible to explain the features of the geographical distribution of plants and animals.

Molecular biology data have confirmed and refined conclusions about evolution from other fields of science.

Spotted flies

Extremity evolution in the earliest terrestrial vertebrates

Evolution of whales and dolphins

Biological evolution explains the origin and history of our species.

Chapter three

Creationist views

Creationists reject scientific methods and data.

The creationist concept of intelligent design does not fit the scientific evidence.

Attempts to curtail the teaching of evolution and promote non-scientific alternatives to it in public schools threaten the quality of education.

Quotes from court reports

Chapter four

Conclusion

Frequently asked Questions

Is it true that evolution and religion contradict each other?

Is it true that the concept of evolution is also a matter of faith?

How can random biological changes lead to more adaptable organisms?

Is it true that many questions about evolution still have no definitive answer and that many famous scientists reject evolution?

What evidence is there that the universe is billions of years old?

Why can’t students be taught critical thinking by teaching them about the “controversial” nature of evolutionary theory?

What are the general ideas behind creationism?

Would it be fair to teach creationism along with evolution in school?

Is it true that science refutes religion?

Recommended reading

the Internet

Scientific work, the results of which are discussed in this book

Books on evolution, the nature of science, and science education

Evolution books

Books on human evolution

Evolution Books for Children and Young People

Books about the origin of the Earth and the Universe

Books on Genetic Research and Evolution

Books on the evolutionist-creationist controversy

Authors’ biographies

Staff and consultant biographies

Chapter 1 >>

Academician Andrey Anatolyevich Zaliznyak

The lecture was delivered on February 5, 2010 at the Moomin School.

We are grateful to Andrey Anatolyevich Zaliznyak and the Moomintroll school for the provided transcript of the lecture.

Start. Continuation

Last time, a little over a year ago, I told this audience something about historical linguistics. I wanted to tell you a lot then, but in time I managed to state only a part, and I spoke about the rest quite fluently. Now I will take this opportunity and continue what I was going to tell even then, but that does not fit into one lecture. I will repeat a little what happened last time – as a reminder.

Let me remind you that in the first lecture we talked for a long time about the concept of the antiquity of languages, the antiquity of their names, whether or not there is a difference between languages ​​in antiquity – I will not repeat this.

The most significant thing that was told last time is the position that all languages ​​change, no language remains unchanged over time. And these changes, at least as far as the phonetics of the language are concerned, are subject to certain laws.

The main one is that phonetic changes are not individual for any one word or one sentence, but if they occur, they occur as a regular change of some phoneme, which already covers all words where this phoneme occurs. That is, if in some word in the course of the history of the language, for example, o without stress changes into a, then this cannot be limited to this one word. It can only be a general change in all cases in the language when o was in a position without stress; namely, in this position it begins to be pronounced as a. This is the most important principle for the history of all languages, and I hope that I can further proceed from it as from something achieved, because the rest is largely derived from it.

And now we will talk about more specific things, and we will have to constantly use this principle, but we will talk about its particular manifestations.

First, a more general question: how do linguists generally know anything about the previous state of the language or languages? Human life is short, it is just a moment compared to the time the language lives; and what a person can directly observe while he lives is a very insignificant part of the history of language. And to see and find out how it was 200 years ago, 300 years ago, a thousand and two thousand years ago – we have no direct opportunities. Nevertheless, modern linguists know a lot about how a particular language looked like: Russian, French, etc. – before the real sound that we can hear now appeared.

What are the ways here? Here I will name them. The first, logically the simplest, is based on the fact that if we are talking about a language where there has been writing for a long time, then written evidence of previous eras remains. Well, in fact, it should be understood, of course, that the vast majority of languages ​​still remain unwritten, and if we take the situation, say, 200 years earlier, then part of the written languages ​​in the total number of languages ​​of the world was absolutely insignificant. But still, now there are already a fairly large number of languages ​​with a written tradition. This writing tradition can be measured in years. There are early-written languages ​​in which writing was introduced not too long ago, say, 200 years ago. Even younger writing, in which writing was introduced 50 years ago, and so on. But there are old-written languages, where the tradition goes back centuries. The Russian language belongs, of course, to the number of old-written languages, where the written tradition goes back about a thousand years. There are also longer traditions, say, the tradition of the English language is somewhat larger. The same is true for the French language, and, say, the tradition of the Chinese language is more than three thousand years old.

In this case, if we are talking about a language where documents of the previous writing have been preserved to some extent, the first and simplest source of knowledge about how the language looked before is reading these texts.